Just after midnight, President Donald Trump took to his favorite social media platform–Twitter–and sent out a puzzling tweet.

Damn, they deleted the tweet! Good that I have a screenshot. #covfefe pic.twitter.com/pjIhkXqw7I

— Katya Bohdan (@katyabohdan) May 31, 2017

It’s pretty clear that Trump meant “coverage” as opposed to “covfefe” which…isn’t a word, despite his team’s bizarre claims that he was referring to some sort of inside joke. But it doesn’t really matter why Trump tweeted out the non-word, because the rest of Twitter had a ton of fun with it. Check out the best of the new, beloved #covfefe meme below:

covfefe
covfef
covfe
covf
cov
co
c
co
com
comi
comin
coming
coming o
coming ou
coming out of my cage and i’ve been doing just fine

— mar (@happiestweekes) May 31, 2017

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Best Twitter Responses to “Covfefe” appeared first on Law Street.

Twitter is riddled with parody accounts, but one in particular has been helping people laugh through their fears for the past week. The parody account “Future CNN” has been offering people a kind of respite from the craziness of the news–giving us a look into what the future may hold for CNN’s coverage.

The account tweets images of made-up future CNN chyrons that are as hilarious as they are jarringly accurate. The chyrons poke fun at Trump’s, shall we say, “impulsiveness,” CNN’s coverage/panels, and the general insanity we’ve seen in politics over the past couple of weeks.

The account first tweeted last Monday, and since then it has gained the attention of some prominent political reporters and actual CNN employees, including “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter.

Here’s a sample of the account’s tweets:

pic.twitter.com/XirE9EIpvM

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) January 30, 2017

pic.twitter.com/SoemTPaRd8

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) January 31, 2017

pic.twitter.com/faTZIns0Vc

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 1, 2017

pic.twitter.com/BJ9JjrkRyx

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 3, 2017

pic.twitter.com/vwAAWwmcWT

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 3, 2017

pic.twitter.com/Nf3dMZEONV

— FutureCNN (@FutureCNN) February 7, 2017

It might be helpful to remind people that this is a parody account. Also, it is helpful to remind people that Twitter is free. And horrible. And also beautiful, but, you know, in a kind of horrible way.

You can follow “Future CNN” at @FutureCNN

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post “Future CNN” is Helping People Laugh Through Their Fears on Twitter appeared first on Law Street.

It seems like there’s always a new speech from one of the presidential candidates on TV, trending on YouTube, or live streaming on Facebook. Sure, Trump’s speeches are bombastic, spittle-flecked, and nonsensical, making them much more fun to watch–but Clinton’s speeches contain their own bits of fun. After watching hours of footage on Clinton campaigning over the last few months,  I’ve noticed that the same thoughts come to me with every speech I watch. So here are the 10 thoughts I have when I watch a Hillary Clinton speech.

1.Wow, I’m Totally Hypnotized By Her Metronomic Nodding

The sun sets, the tide comes in, Hillary nods. It’s a force of nature.

Whether she’s grooving on the crowd’s positive vibes, or listening to an interviewer, moderator, or ‘everyday American,’ Secretary Clinton’s head bobs along with mechanical timing. Could she really be paying such close attention to the other person talking?  Either Hill is a very, very patient person, or the nodding is her way of rewinding the large spring in her spine that provides her with energy. Alternate Theory: She’s always got “Smooth” by Santana stuck in her head, and is following the beat at all times.

”My muñequita, my Spanish Harlem Mona Lisa”

2. Is It Weird If I Say “Girl Power?”

Pictured: Hillary Clinton and Meryl Streep, BFFs.

I’m a dude, which means I don’t fully appreciate how cool Hillary’s candidacy is–this is really the first time everyone in the country is listening to what a woman has to say as a presidential candidate. So when H-Dawg refuses to back down from supporting women, it reveals a little glimpse of a female-positive future. We’ve got female Ghostbusters now, and the world didn’t end, so can’t we let a woman lead this country?

3. Oh Boy, Here Comes The Pun

This is exactly how I laugh when I remember something funny I saw online earlier, and can’t explain it to others.

You know the lines I’m talking about. The jokes written into her speeches that are just funny enough to include, but provide a little dose of cringe as well. Doing her best 1992-era Ellen impression, Hillary riffs:

Trump U. That doesn’t sound appropriate, does it? I am going to use that more. Because if he gets anywhere near the White House, you know what he is going to do? He is going to Trump U.

Oh, I get it! It’s like “F. U.” but with Trump’s name? Brilliant. How about saying that if “playing the woman card is fighting for equal wages, women’s health, and paid family leave, then deal me in!” I’m clapping for the cause, but I’m sort of faking the laugh.

4. Don’t Hurt Yourself!

“Rough, rough, rough”–Clinton describes the effect her busy speaking schedule has on her voice.

I’ve got mad love for Secretary Clinton, but I’ve got to be honest; sometimes she shouts a bit too much. I hope that’s not sexist to say, considering I think Bernie Sanders always shouts too much. Being on the campaign trail has got to be tough for many reasons, but in the day and age of the microphone it shouldn’t be tough on your vocal cords. Hillary’s voice is already sore and hoarse from all the talking she has to do, so please, leave the yelling to Trump, it doesn’t pantsuit you, Hill. Plus, haven’t promising Democratic candidates been burned by yelling in the past?

5. Her Hand Motions Are So Precise

If I had photoshop abilities, I’d add some googly eyes and feathers to Hillary’s hand to make an emu. I don’t. So I didn’t.

Every speaker has their own set of hand motions. You’ve got Trump’s little fists doing a lot of sliding and pointing, Bernie pawing and petting the air with both hands in different directions, and Obama’s measured gestures. Hillary’s got her own set–the most notable one being the pinch-and-poke. Her hand forms the beak of an emu, and it snaps in the air with each syllable.

6. I Start Imagining A Trump Presidency

“A wall? And WHO’S gonna pay for it?”

Trump can’t be president. I mean, there’s just no way something that cataclysmic could actually happen. A guy with no political experience, policy savvy, or common sense certainly can’t con the country into giving him the White House? Then again, today on my walk to work I ran into no fewer than a dozen Pokémon trainers, so maybe the end-times are upon us. Either way, you just have to laugh, if only to keep from crying.

7. I Do A Wardrobe Moral Double Take 

She gets mega-points for calling out sexism in reporting. I lose mega-points for creating sexism in reporting.

This might also be dangerous territory. As with any speech, at a certain point I get a little lost and focus on the visuals, forming my opinion of what Hillary is wearing. Do I do that for male politicians? Short Answer: No. (Long Answer: Only if they’re wearing a tan suit.) Sometimes I think what she’s wearing looks great, or I notice that I like the current hairstyle better than the one she had a few months ago. But then I start to worry, “is it alright for me to have an opinion on this?” I’m undoing all the great feminist work that Susan B. Anthony and Alanis Morissette fought for! So I stay positive, and try to focus my attention on the ideas being shared, rather than the fabric being worn.

8. Start Vibing Off Of The Nuanced Discussion Of The Issues

That bulb in the background is bursting the same way my head does when I hear “this problem has systemic causes” this election cycle instead of “We’re losing. We’re gonna win.”

I’ve got these large, honkin’ headphones with an eight-foot long cord, and they block out the outside world entirely. This might be a guilty pleasure, but sometimes when I’m watching a speech live on my computer, I slide on those headphones, close my eyes, and bask in the nuanced language and detailed discussion. Hours in front of the TV have filled my ears with dozens of soundbites played over and over, and simplified solutions (a twelve-billion dollar wall, anyone?) Because of this barrage, it’s nice to hone in on a reasonable person speaking reasonably about reasonable ideas. Ahhh, knowledge truly is bliss.

9. Oh My God That Face

My face, the minute I’m accused of absolutely anything, while deciding how honest I’m gonna be when I respond.

You can’t spell serious without “Clinton.” Or maybe you can–I’m not gonna try. The point is, for a ‘boring candidate,’ she’s got a whole catalog of hilarious facial expressions. Watching her speeches easily inspires a drinking game–one sip for every emu-peck, clapping-laugh, funny face, or Donald Trump diss. (Actually, please drink responsibly…don’t play games designed to make you binge drink)

10. Hey, She’s Not So Bad At This

Is there a way to make my computer background a gif? There must be. If so, I’d like to use this one please.

Hillary Clinton will tell you that she’s not a natural campaigner, and not a gifted orator. While she does seem to be better suited for a conference or situation room than a sold-out arena, every once in a while her speeches contain moments of excellence. Even the most logical supporter might get a little carried away at points during her nomination announcement speech, where the energy of the room is through the roof. It’s enough to make you shout “Yaass!” and then feel self-conscious for saying yaass out loud. Don’t worry, you won’t have to be self-conscious on inauguration day.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post 10 Thoughts I Have While Watching a Hillary Clinton Speech appeared first on Law Street.

The Supreme Court handed down several major rulings yesterday and, as is the case whenever the court decides to weigh in on a social issue, a lot of people got really mad. While watching people get angry on social media is always good fun on its own, this time, there was an added level of entertainment as people tweeted their dissatisfaction at SCOTUSblog’s twitter account, thinking that it was the actual Supreme Court.

SCOTUSblog, a website dedicated to tracking all things related to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), is not, in fact, operated by or in any way affiliated with the actual Supreme Court. But that doesn’t stop the flood of angry Twitter mentions that it receives at the end of each court term. In fact, its Twitter bio features a nice disclaimer, “A private blog. NOT THE JUSTICES OR THE COURT.” Thankfully, its Twitter account sets aside some time on each of these special nights to respond to many of the mistaken Twitter users.

On Monday afternoon, it started off with a warning to its current followers (who are presumably aware that it is not the actual Supreme Court) as well as some satire to set the scene:

You have one minute to unfollow us before we fill your Twitter feed.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

#BREAKING: facing constitutional crisis, in an unprecedented move, a blog was named to the empty ninth seat on the Supreme Court.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

And then it began. Here’s a collection of some of the best responses from yesterday:

We don’t rule “against the Constitution.” We twist it however we want. MT @pswise1 @SCOTUSblog Is RACIST &Again Rules Against Constitution

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

So funny bc we’re just flipping coins. Math says we’ll eventually get one right MT @somhrd50 @SCOTUSblog always on the wrong side of history

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

No! Expose who killed Vince Foster, indict Clinton, THEN impeach him. MT @hendog127@SCOTUSblog -Your first OBLIGATION IS TO IMPEACH OBAMA

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

Here’s someone calling SCOTUSblog dumb (while at the same time confusing SCOTUSblog for the actual Supreme Court):

What makes you look dumbest, Bets’? MT @BetsyKerr Nothing makes @SCOTUSblog look dumber than a judge dissenting w/irrelevant opinion.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

I’ll let you unpack this one:

Keep it? Most men will prolly oblige. #nadaforzada MT @zadabee @SCOTUSblog Stop killing sperm! Man controls the sperm: KEEP IT~

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

Here’s a nice reference to SCOTUSblog’s Twitter bio, which pretty clearly states that it is not affiliated with the actual court. But hey, who takes the time to read Twitter bios before angry tweeting?

Twitter descriptions are good reads too MT @carryabigstaff @SCOTUSblog If you read the Constitution, you know there is no right to privacy.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

Not all of the tweets were angry–some were happy with the court’s decision to strike down provisions in Texas’s HB 2, a law that placed what the court deemed to be undue restrictions on abortion providers.

Honestly, we were 5-3 on selling you to @zombieblog. MT @slclaridge Thanks @SCOTUSblog for continuing to let ME have control over MY body.

— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 27, 2016

To cap it off, SCOTUSblog ended up trolling unknowing Twitter users so well that Twitter actually suspended its account thinking that it was hacked. The blog posted an update explaining what happened and after a couple of hours, everything was back to normal: it returned to tweeting serious court news. Apparently the annual “running of the trolls” worked too well this time around.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post No Twitter Users, SCOTUSblog is not the Supreme Court appeared first on Law Street.

When you’re making a crossword puzzle, it’s very easy to create a difficult puzzle with next-to-impossible clues. It is also incredibly difficult to make a crossword puzzle that is easy to solve, fitting only common words into the grid. Conspiracy theories work pretty much the same way–with a lot of careful effort, you can create a theory that just might be easy to swallow. It sounds totally crazy but maybe, just maybe there actually was a second shooter behind the grassy knoll. It would be completely bananas, but it’s possible that the NBA rigged the championship because of a blood-oath with LeBron. These are conspiracies, but there’s enough fact surrounding them to give them the veneer of truth.

Since politics can get boring, let’s take a break from all the facts and figures for a moment and have some fun crafting our own conspiracy theory. But what type to choose?

When it comes to current-day political conspiracies, no theory is more widespread or worse-explained than the Illuminati. In case you’ve been living under a rock, or have been brainwashed into sheeple by the mainstream media, the Illuminati were essentially members of a really nerdy book club in the 1770s that lasted for about ten years before being shut down. To conspiracy theorists, the Illuminati is still alive, and its members are pulling all of the world’s strings behind closed doors. They’re meeting in person in top-secret locales and exercising unimaginable influence over world leaders. They also leave fun hints and clues for us to find, because apparently they prefer fun I-Spy games more than actually staying secret.

Actual footage from the moon landing, cut from broadcast for suspicious reasons.

So what does this have to do with the 2016 Presidential Election? I’d tell you, but then I’d have to kill you.

Only joking. You might have seen thumbnails in your recommended videos section on YouTube featuring Hillary Clinton dressed in demonic fashion, or perhaps George W. Bush surrounded by pyramids, and wondered where they come from. Essentially, Americans who are frustrated with our political system, or likely confused by it, concoct clandestine backdoor reasons for every major event in history, claiming that it is all part of a grand scheme for “New World Order.” That’s basically a spooky way of saying a world government designed to oppress all people.

Why should we let the crackpots have all the fun? Here’s a step-by-step guide to creating your own conspiracy, and getting one step closer to the “ultimate truth.”

1. Pick an event you didn’t like.

Feel free to choose something like a famous atrocity, or something like alleged voting discrepancies from North Dakota’s democratic caucus. Explain that the explanation the general public has been fed is not only untrue, but supported by false-flag evidence planted by someone important, like the Koch brothers, or Oprah.

2. Diagnose the real cause

Clearly the BP oil spill and Vince Foster‘s death were both decided in a boardroom by old men in suits. There’s an underlying reason for every random, senseless event, and it’s usually a stepping stone to the ultimate plan.

3. Tie it back to a easily vilified celebrity figure

Either go for the typical “Kenyan Muslim President” route, or think of something more interesting. If you need inspiration, I still trust this conspiracy site I found–I know the source is from 2 years ago–that says Clinton is “a 6th level Illuminati witch & sadistic Monarch slave handler.”

A rare glimpse into the bunker below the White House where the real meetings happen.

So why do people believe in these theories? Illuminati conspiracy theorists are typically people who find it frustrating to believe that either hard work or luck is good enough to propel someone to powerful positions. They take comfort in the idea that there is no hope changing the status quo unless you’ve been pre-selected by the chosen few. Plus, by virtue of “knowing the truth,” you’re smarter than all of your friends.

The most disappointing part of conspiracy theories like this is that it looks remarkable similar to the real non-conspiracy world we live in now. The idea that a select few meet to discuss powerful changes to the world is already true, and it happens all the time. Of course Barack Obama, Angela Merkel, and Xi Jinping control what happens around the world–that’s their job! Hillary Clinton is smart enough to orchestrate secret society cover-ups and rig an entire election, but apparently not smart enough to become as powerful and influential as she currently is by virtue of her own actions.

“Silly Season” is meant to only last a few weeks during the primaries, but given the tone of the 2016 General Election so far, silly season has been extended indefinitely. Why not amp up the chaos a bit more, and introduce some really crazy ideas? It’s not enough to say Trump might be a plant by the Clinton family to ensure a Democratic victory–make sure it’s part of a world-wide conspiracy as well.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Anatomy of An Illuminati Political Conspiracy appeared first on Law Street.

Following Donald Trump’s win in Indiana’s primary Tuesday, Ted Cruz finally did the inevitable and announced he’s dropping out of the presidential race. We really aren’t all that sad to see “lyin Ted” go, but we are bummed that we officially have to acknowledge Donald Trump as the Republican party’s presumptive nominee.

But wait, isn’t someone else still chugging along in the GOP primaries? What’s his name again?

Oh yeah, John Kasich!

Granted it’s kind of hard to remember the Ohio governor when he’s lost every state except his home state and still trails Cruz and Rubio, who both value numbers and logic and have dropped out.

Stephen Colbert couldn’t help but make light of this during Wednesday’s episode of the “Late Show.”

Colbert mocked Kasich’s mathematically impossible odds, as well as a recent video released from a pro-Kasich Super PAC imagining Kasich winning the nomination. In typical Colbert fashion, the comedian crafted his own heavily photoshopped ad imagining a world where Kasich is in fact president…and a five-term one at that!

In Colbert’s fantasy, President Kasich prompts Obama to resign early to make way for him, defeats ISIS, balances the budget, and defeats spider beasts from space. And we can’t forget to mention that he also throws the winning pass in the Super Bowl with three seconds left to, who else, John Kasich!

Sadly Kasich will likely never do any of these things, but it still makes us laugh.

Unfortunately, there has been lots of speculation that Kasich could announce he’s dropping out today, but that has not yet been officially confirmed.

Watch Colbert Imagine Kasich as President Below

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Stephen Colbert: “Quitters Never Win…but They Still Beat John Kasich” appeared first on Law Street.

Last night, President Barack Obama’s final White House Correspondents’ dinner as sitting president was held at the Washington Hilton in D.C. Celebrities, reporters, and politicians all dressed up in their finest for a night of (mostly laughs), and Obama didn’t disappoint. Check out five of the funniest moments from Obama’s speech last night.

Obama vs. Donald Trump

It should come as a surprise to no one, but Obama went after the walking joke that is the Republican frontrunner Donald Trump. Obama pointed out that Trump hadn’t attended the dinner, saying:

Well let me conclude tonight on a more serious note. I want to thank the Washington press corps. The free press is central to our democracy and … nah! I’m just kidding! You know I’m gonna talk about Trump! Come on!

And it is surprising: You’ve got a room full of reporters, celebrities, cameras — and he says no.

Is this dinner too tacky for The Donald? What could he possibly be doing instead? Is he at home, eating a Trump steak, tweeting out insults to Angela Merkel? What’s he doing?

And he ended his Trump tirade with this zinger:

And there is one area where Donald’s experience could be invaluable and that’s closing Guantanamo because Trump knows a thing or two about running waterfront properties into the ground.

While the Trump-talk certainly wasn’t a surprise, it was a lot of fun.

via GIPHY

Sanders & Clinton Get Jabs Too

While Obama was harshest on Trump, he also made some comments about the two Democratic candidates still in the race. About billionaire-basher Bernie Sanders, Obama said:

For example, we’ve got the bright new face of the Democratic Party here tonight, Mr. Bernie Sanders. Bernie, you look like a million bucks. Or, to put it in terms you’ll understand, you look like 37,000 donations of $27 each.

Obama also joked about Hillary’s slogan, pretending it was “Trudge up a Hill” as opposed to Bernie’s more youthful “Feel the Bern,” and her seeming inability to connect with younger voters:

You’ve got to admit it though, Hillary trying to appeal to young voters is a little bit like your relative who just signed up for Facebook. ‘Dear America, did you get my poke. Is it appearing on your wall? I’m not sure I’m using this right. Love, Aunt Hillary.’

And a Little Fun at His Own Expense

Obama didn’t shy away from making fun of himself a bit, particularly when it comes to his meetings with world leaders. He made a reference to Prince George greeting the President in his bathrobe:

Even some foreign leaders, they’ve been looking ahead, anticipating my departure. Last week, Prince George showed up to our meeting in his bathrobe. That was a slap in the face. A clear breach of protocol.

Which (side note) led to this adorable picture:

Toddler prince meets President; bathrobe steals the show https://t.co/ofE5Q2cYxP #PrinceGeorge #bathrobe pic.twitter.com/OxnMZzuwZ2

— Acculturated (@Acculturated) April 26, 2016

Obama also commented on his recent meeting with his younger and very handsome Canadian counterpart, Justin Trudeau:

In fact somebody recently said to me, ‘Mr. President, you are so yesterday. Justin Trudeau has completely replaced you. He is so handsome and he’s so charming. He’s the future.’ And I said ‘Justin, just give it a rest.’ I resented that.

via GIPHY

An Actual, Physical Mic Drop

As a fitting farewell to his last White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Obama left the stage with the comment “Obama, out” and a literal dropping of the mic.

WATCH: Pres. Obama drops the mic at end of #WHCD remarks: “Obama out” https://t.co/cpmMPwSnpo

— ABC News (@ABC) May 1, 2016

John Boehner Video

Finally, I’m just going to let this fantastic video about what Obama will do when he’s no longer in office (also starring Joe Biden, Michelle Obama, and John Boehner) speak for itself:

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 5 Moments of Obama’s Last White House Correspondents’ Dinner Speech appeared first on Law Street.

There’s been a lot of talk about the qualities the United States needs in its next president. Should he or she be a forceful figure who will lead our country in defeating ISIS? Does it matter if the president is fashionable? A financially savvy leader who can pull us out of debt? How old should the president be? With all these different factors to consider, it’s no wonder Americans are confused about who to vote for.

Have no fear, because one undeniable quality stands alone as the most important: how well does a candidate understand the informal rules and faux pas of New York City? And this week, we found out. In a trip to New York to sway voters before the state’s primary, the candidates were tested on city smarts: whether that be their tunnel talent, as they traveled under the city to get from place to place; their pizza wisdom, as they sat down for a big ol’ slice of pie; or their general understanding of how to be human in a city, in the case of Ted Cruz. Needless to say, some candidates quickly came out on top.

#1… John Kasich

While Kasich may be last in the polls, at least he was first in our hearts when he visited this local deli in the Bronx. With his “can do” attitude–which propelled him to eat two helpings of spaghetti, a personalized sandwich, and more–and a winning smile for the crowd, Kasich was easily the most charming visitor in New York.

A crazy and memorable scene in the Bronx this afternoon as Kasich stopped to chow down on some food at Mike’s Deli pic.twitter.com/FA2F8rQNEB

— Kailani Koenig (@kailanikm) April 7, 2016

Unfortunately for Kasich, he doesn’t have a perfect NYC record after a pizza disaster a few weeks ago, in which he was seen eating a slice with a fork and a knife. Come on John, talk about detrimental gaffes!

John Kasich just ate his pizza with a fork and knife pic.twitter.com/KQ0UXCoJjN

— GIF The News (@NowThisGIF) March 30, 2016

Luckily for him, the likable dining-sesh at Mike’s Deli helped New Yorkers forgive and forget when it came to the recent pizz-astrophe, just not quite enough to actually put him ahead of Trump in any of the real polls.

#2… Donald Trump

As one of three candidates with actual ties to New York, Trump was a standout this past week. After repeatedly being attacked by Ted Cruz for his “New York values,” Trump took the opportunity to show exactly what he thinks New York values are. He and his wife, Melania Trump, toured the 9/11 Memorial Museum, also dropping a whopping $100,000 donation to the museum. With his name already all over a lot of the city, thanks to the Trump Tower, this donation just helped Trump secure what was already a pretty striking lead in his home state.

#3… Bernie Sanders

Sanders, another New York native, had a bit more of a rough go this week after he failed to answer some questions about the city correctly. When the Senator was asked to comment on the cheapest way to ride the subway, he jokingly cited jumping over the turnstile as the best way to save a quick buck–how cute! Unfortunately, when pressed a little further on the issue, Sanders showed just how lacking in city smarts he has become since moving to Vermont and working in D.C.:

What do you mean, ‘How do you ride the subway these days? You get a token and you get on.

For those of you who, like Sanders, may not have been on the subway in quite a while, the joke here is that subway tokens haven’t been used in New York in over a decade. Oops! Looks like your age is showing just a tad, Bernie. But, all in all, a valiant effort.

#4… Hillary Clinton

Clinton’s trip to New York may have been the most memorable and newsworthy visit, as it spurred tons of articles, parody videos, and internet memes making fun of her clear inability to use public transportation. For that reason alone, Clinton ranks near the very bottom of the list.

So, what actually happened? When entering any form of a subway system, the most annoying thing that can happen is someone holding up the turnstiles. And that’s exactly what Clinton did. It took not one, not two, but five swipes of her MetroCard to get through the turnstile. Talk about a serious city faux pas!

The good news about this gaffe? Her campaign has turned it into a quite hilarious 404 page on her website. Whenever you click a link or page that no longer exists on Clinton’s website, you are redirected to a gif of her swiping her MetroCard with a message that reads, “trying to get where you want to go? This page isn’t it.” While the campaign may be making light of a potentially negative situation, there’s only so much joking around you can do about a candidate’s ability to handle New York.

Clinton clearly wasn’t ready for the underground travel; how can we be sure she can handle the sad D.C. Metro or the country?

#5… Ted Cruz

Last on the list is Ted Cruz. Not only does this man not know how to act in the city, he straight up insulted NYC in a past debate with Donald Trump. After using “New York values” to insult Trump, Cruz was not welcomed with open arms when he traveled to the Bronx last week. A school in the Bronx canceled a visit from Cruz after the students threatened to stage a walk out because they didn’t agree with his views. Cruz was also heckled out of a restaurant where he was eating by angry protestors who believe that his anti-immigration platform is the opposite of everything people in the Bronx stand for. The Daily News featured nasty slogans, slamming Cruz for his anti-NY sentiment on multiple newspaper covers.

@Nannygal2 @amperg33 @wakeuppeopleSOS @tedcruz DROP DEAD TED! Now polling in NY at 16%!! NY HATES LYING TED!! pic.twitter.com/TuUAHS86jr

— Dawn Murray (@dawnellemurray) April 7, 2016

While there are obviously other factors to take into account when voting for president, these New York successes and failures could be pretty influential in swaying voters one way or another. What the candidates have hopefully learned from their New York trips is that it’s important to respect the places they campaign in and appreciate the diverse groups of people they will represent if elected president. After all, city and travel etiquette can say a lot about a person.

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post Who Did it Best? The Candidates Take on the Big Apple appeared first on Law Street.

It’s been a good day for conspiracy theorists. Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Chair John Podesta believes that the truth is out there—and wants it shared with the American public. During a recent appearance on “The Lead” with Jake Tapper, Podesta argued that the American people are being kept in the dark about UFOs.

“The U.S. government could do a much better job in answering the quite legitimate questions that people have about what’s going on with unidentified aerial phenomena,” he said. When probed further on the question, Podesta said, “That’s for the public to judge once they’ve seen all the evidence that the U.S. government has… There are a lot of planets out there, the American people can handle the truth.”

Podesta served as a counselor in the Obama Administration and lamented that his greatest failure of 2014 was not being granted permission to disclose the White House’s files on UFOs.

John Podesta’s reaction when told that he can’t release the UFO information.

It’s not totally crazy for the Clinton campaign to address the American people’s concerns about UFOs and alien contact. About half of Americans believe that there is extraterrestrial life, according to a YouGov poll. And there are likely many citizens who don’t firmly believe in UFOs but are open to the idea. Let’s call them “sky-curious.”

Responding to some of these concerned voters, Clinton said in an interview, “I’ll definitely get to the bottom of it… Maybe we could have, like, a task force go to Area 51.” Although she was joking and laughing while making those suggestions, she is serious about declassifying as much Area 51 material as possible. Podesta wants to make sure that Hillary wouldn’t forget that promise, saying “I think that’s a commitment that she intends to keep and that I intend to hold her to.”

This serves as excellent motivation for me to finish my spec script for the X-Files reboot where Hillary Clinton is the sitting president. I’ll provide an excerpt:

[ Secret Bunker Beneath The White House, Interior.]

MULDER: You’re telling me that I’ve been working on the X-Files for 23 years, and we’ve had a complete list of all real extraterrestrial and paranormal encounters just sitting in a filing cabinet?

CLINTON [Nodding metronomically]: Yes, that’s exactly right. It turns out that everything you’ve seen is real. Except for the killer trees, and most of the werewolf episodes. Those weren’t great.

SCULLY [poring over documents stained by Nixon’s Cheeto-dust]: This is incredible… detailed autopsies of creatures with organs completely unlike our understanding of terrestrial life. And there’s this fascinating report about lizard-people wearing human disguises to attain positions of pow—

CLINTON: Actually, I’m gonna need that one back.

Unfortunately, 20th Century Fox continues to send me cease-and-desist letters, rather than job offers.

It’s like they can’t see true talent staring them in the face.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post President Hillary Clinton Would Release The X-Files appeared first on Law Street.

You open up your email after getting to work on Friday morning, and you see that right above an email from Amazon asking you to finally buy the panini press that’s been sitting on your wish list for months, you have an email from Reince Priebus. Confused, you open the email, and you realize that it’s an evite. “Who uses evites anymore?” you wonder. The message, in no-nonsense, 11-point Arial, says:

Paul Ryan and I are throwing a big party tonight at 10 p.m., and you’re invited. I was gonna co-host with John Boehner, but he got cold feet and decided he’d rather not be responsible for what happens. So anyway, there’s gonna be beer, foosball, and absolutely no marijuana—even for medical purposes. We’ve invited basically everyone we know, so get here, early because it’s probably gonna be crowded.

Sincerely,

Reince Priebus,
Chairman, RNC

Your only other plans for the night were stream “X-Files” and decide which Trader Joes dinner to microwave, so you figure—why not? When work ends, you head home, eat some leftovers, and get stuck for a moment on what to wear. How do you dress for a Republican party? You briefly consider some bullet casing jewelry or your favorite “right-winger bitter-clinging” spangly jacket, but you decide on a Reagan/Bush ’84 T-shirt with a blazer. Hip.

Around 10:20 pm, you arrive at the house and see 17 cars in the driveway, so you park further down the street to avoid the inevitable chaos that leaving the Republican party will cause. When you approach the front door, you see a handwritten sign that reads, “We accidentally got the front door stuck. We know it’s not too safe, but we’ve requested that the backdoor remain opened. We’re all cool with this.” You trudge around the side of the house, thinking that this must be what it feels like to be Apple.

Once you walk inside, you’re immediately deafened by the volume of chatter in the crowded basement. Reasonably, there should only be a few people here, but instead, there are so many faces and names that you can barely keep track. This is going to be a long night.

You venture into the fray and see Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, and Lindsey Graham all huddled in a corner, quibbling about how to get people to notice them. Rick Santorum meanwhile, is involved in a furious debate over whether Muslims or gays are more dangerous. He comes to the conclusion that a gay Muslim would be the most dangerous. He is talking to himself.

Carly Fiorina is being a bit of a buzzkill, because she won’t stop telling people about a found-footage horror movie she just saw, giving some pretty gory details about bloody baby parts. Someone asks her for the name of the movie, but Carly mumbles something about not remembering and quickly walks away. You hear Ben Carson telling George Pataki that the pyramids were built for grain, that he once attacked a man in a murder attempt, and that prisons are gay conversion camps. George responds, “Alright, but I just asked if you knew where the bathroom was.”

Jeb! Bush seems to be flitting between groups of people, trying to tell them a joke or ask how they feel about his cowboy boots. No one seems to be engaging with him, so he sits at the table eating some of the guacamole he brought. He gets excited when Marco Rubio comes over to the table, but after a scoop of guacamole, Marco retreats back to his corner and visibly winces as Chris Christie ambles over to him with a menacing look.

John Kasich is rifling through the CD rack, looking for some Linkin Park to play. Reince doesn’t have any Linkin Park CDs in his house because he isn’t a 15-year-old who’s mad at his dad. You ask John why he wants to play Linkin Park and he says, “they’re really good and I like those guys.” John looks sad.

Sitting on the couch, holding the bible in one hand and “The Catcher in the Rye” in the other, is Ted Cruz. It’s a huge couch—large enough to hold at least six or seven people–but for some reason, no one is sitting with him. Literally every person at this party is standing. Many look tired, but they refuse to sit with Ted. Ted is shouting but you can’t tell at whom, and the only phrase you hear is “radical Islamic terrorism.”

Hunched over in the center of the room, is a familiar face. Donald Trump is actually, literally vomiting on the carpet, and everyone around him begins to cheer for some reason. Reince sees you gawking at him, and shouts in your ear over the music, “We didn’t invite him! He’s been really rude, but for some reason he seems to be really popular, so we’re scared that if we kick him out, everyone will leave. Don’t worry, we’ve got it under control.” You see him pour some club soda into a sprayer bottle and hustle over.

After the cleanup effort, Reince and Paul turn off the music and say that some people have to leave. They’ve gotten a noise complaint from their “lamestream” neighbors. Dolefully, Rick Perry and Jim Gilmore head out the door. Wait, who is Jim Gilmore? And Rick Perry was here? You could have sworn that he went to last year’s party, but didn’t expect him to show up again after that party foul. Following Perry, Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, Lindsey Graham, and George Pataki all get up to go. Then, in a mass exodus that feels like it takes months, everyone slowly files out. On their way out, you see Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee. Were they here too? How many evites did Reince send?

All that’s left now is Donald, Ted, and John. Mitt Romney comes downstairs and starts to lecture Donald on behaving maturely. Is Mitt Romney the GOP’s dad? you find yourself wondering. Donald hears this but listens to none of it. Mitt heads back upstairs, to resume his DVRed Jeopardy! episode and finish his glass of milk, you assume. You see Donald pull out his phone and bark into it: “Hey Sarah? Yeah, this party is very low energy–sad! I need you to come over here and liven it up a bit.”

You realize that you’re now standing in a room with Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich when you have a Netflix account and there’s a perfectly good armchair at your place underneath your poster of George H. W. Bush. You head to the bathroom, sneak out the window, and high-tail it to your car. On the drive home, you hold back a tear.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post If the Republican Party Was an Actual Party appeared first on Law Street.

Could you be arrested for attempting to be funny on social media? Apparently, yes. A 27-year-old man named Anthony Novak from Parma, Ohio is facing criminal charges for creating a Facebook account that parodied the Parma City Police Department.

The account confused people from all over the city of Parma as the two accounts were almost identical, except for what they were posting. While the real police department page featured posts about local happenings and updates surrounding crime in Parma, the parody account had satirical posts about the requirements to become a Parma police officer and other supposedly “inflammatory topics.” In one such post, Novak wrote

The Parma Civil Service Commission will conduct a written exam for basic Police Officer for the City of Parma to establish an eligibility list. The exam will be held on March 12, 2016. Applications are available February 14, 2016 through March 2, 2016. Parma is an equal opportunity employer but is strongly encouraging minorities not to apply. The test will consist of a 15 question multiple choice definition test followed by a hearing test. Should you pass you will be accepted as an officer of the Parma Police Department.

In response to the parody posts being shared on the fake account’s wall, the Parma Police department posted a statement to warn its followers about the Parma fraud:

The Parma Police Department would like to warn the public that a fake Parma Police Facebook page has been created. This matter is currently being investigated by the Parma Police Department and Facebook. This is the Parma Police Department’s official Facebook page. The public should disregard any and all information posted on the fake Facebook account.

Novak is facing potential felony charges for disrupting public services through his use of satire on his parody account. The question of whether or not this is an infringement on Novak’s freedom of speech has been brought up in the conversation about if he should be charged. Lieutenant Kevin Riley argues that the material posted on the fake website caused a risk to public safety because of its inflammatory and derogatory nature. Because this material crossed the line from funny satire to potentially harmful, Novak’s arguments are criminal.

Did Novak’s satire cause any harm to the citizens of Parma? The answer is unclear. Some people voiced a love of the parody on twitter.

The fake city of Parma police department page was hilarious

— Abby Roetzel (@abbyroetzel) March 3, 2016

Others voiced their irritation with the account in attempt to try to clarify what was going on for confused onlookers.

Somebody set up a fake Parma Police Department Facebook page. The REAL Police are working with FACEBOOK to shut it down.

— Scott Taylor (@ScottTaylorTV) March 2, 2016

Regardless of the public opinion, Novak will appear before a grand jury next week to determine whether or not he should face any charges for his actions. Ever since his arrest, several parody accounts on Facebook have popped up in his absence claiming to be sticking up for free speech. This case certainly poses an interesting question about how far is too far when it comes to satire and could be setting a dangerous precedent by telling someone they will face jail time for a parody Facebook account.

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post Ohio Man Arrested for Creating Parody Facebook Page of Local Police Department appeared first on Law Street.

I was so distracted during Trump’s speech that I almost missed it entirely. No, it wasn’t from looking at videos on my computer or even using my phone…it was because I was fixated on Chris Christie, nestled in the back left-hand corner of the TV screen, who looked far from okay.

Presidential hopeful Donald Trump addressed a crowd in Florida after garnering some lofty Super Tuesday wins. Former presidential hopeful and current governor of New Jersey Chris Christie introduced Trump, but it wasn’t the introduction that made observers concerned for Christie’s safety.

It was in the time after he spoke, while Trump gave his spiel, when it happened. Christie stood behind Trump, expressionless, gazing off into the distance as if to ponder why he had made the decision to speak at the rally.

.@ChrisChristie just gave what looked like a coerced confession.

— Justin Amash (@justinamash) March 2, 2016

Chris Christie trying to figure out how the hell this happened to him https://t.co/5buKrSM9pG

— Nick Robinson (@Babylonian) March 2, 2016

He looked like he was forced to be there, and his strange mannerisms quickly manifested themselves into a meme all over Twitter–trending with #FreeChrisChristie.

Washington Post’s Alexandra Petri put it best:

“Chris Christie spent the entire speech screaming wordlessly. I have never seen someone scream so loudly without using his mouth before. It would have been remarkable if it had not been so terrifying.”

— Matt Viser (@mviser) March 2, 2016

So lifeless, yet so full of regret.

Many have likened his appearance and strange facial expressions to that of a hostage video.

My gooodness Chris Christie looks like he’s appearing in a hostage video. #SuperTuesday

— Mark D. Levine (@MarkLevineNYC) March 2, 2016

Gonna need Chris Christie to hold up a copy of today’s newspaper to prove this is not a prerecorded hologram hostage video

— Tim Mak (@timkmak) March 2, 2016

Christie endorsed “Mr. Trump” this past Friday, a move that shocked many after he had been so critical of the front-runner’s tactics and rhetoric.

As a man who had once said Trump was running not for commander-in-chief but instead for “entertainer-in-chief,” his comments Tuesday night were, to put it mildly, a complete 180.

There’s just one question on Chris Christie’s mind. #SuperTuesdaypic.twitter.com/sSDnCXgxBE

— The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) March 2, 2016

Maybe it’s because the New Hampshire Union Leader recently apologized for endorsing Christie, or because six New Jersey newspapers just asked for his resignation. Maybe we’ll never know. Regardless of what was really going through his head during the speech, we are worried about you Chris Christie.

SEE IT: The many faces of @GovChristiehttps://t.co/GzmrwggTfzpic.twitter.com/T4Vod1wjwk

— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) March 2, 2016

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is Chris Christie Okay? appeared first on Law Street.

It’s finals time for many law school students, but that hasn’t stopped the flow of fantastic legal tweets. Check out the best of the week in the slideshow below:

100% Justified

I only came to law school to learn how to sue club promoters who don’t put unsubscribe links in their weekly party promotion emails

— the other one (@imfromraleigh) December 9, 2015

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

It’s the weekend again, which means it’s time for another round up of the best legal tweets of the week. Check them out in the slideshow below:

Laptops are Sacred

Just witnessed someone drop their laptop down the stairs. Absolutely tragic. Everyone pray her outlines are backed up. #lawschoolproblems

— I Should Be Studying (@paperchasegirl) November 13, 2015

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Halloween everyone! Enjoy your candy, and while you do, check out the best legal tweets of the week.

A Very Serious Question

I wonder if you could sue someone for ruining shows and movies with spoilers. #lawproblems#burningquestion

— Catherine (@Cathface) October 27, 2015

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Best Legal Tweets of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Friday everyone! It’s time for the weird arrests of the week; and there are certainly some good ones this time around. Check out the best arrests of the week in the slideshow below.

A Delicious Robbery

Image courtesy of Thomas Hawk via Flickr

A Michigan woman was arrested this week after she broke into a house, and then fled after being confronted by the homeowner. She hit a tray of cupcakes in the process, which it made it rather easy for the police to identify her–she was covered in icing when they caught up to her.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

The jingle is as memorable as it is incredibly annoying. Beginning in 2008, Subway franchises began offering $5 Footlongs, accompanied by a national advertising campaign. The idea that Subway offers foot-long sandwiches is central to the fast food purveyors’ marketing campaigns and reputation. But some discerning consumers noticed that the sandwiches were a little smaller than they expected–and sued Subway over this clearly debilitating issue. The case was originally filed in 2013, but Subway just announced a proposed settlement that will involve it measuring the sandwiches it gives to consumers in order to guarantee that they’re receiving all the food they’re paying for.

The settlement involves nine named plaintiffs, who argued that Subway was shortchanging them with both its 12 and six-inch subs. The lawsuit claimed that the footlong subs were really only 11.5 inches long, and the six inchers were actually 5.75 inches.

Horrifying, I know.

Based on those claims, the customers decided to serve the sandwich franchise chain a lawsuit for deceptive marketing, as well as the claim that they were charging customers for more food than the customers were actually receiving.

The results of the settlement are multi-faceted. For one, the plaintiffs will each get $1000. For those of you keeping track at home, that’s roughly 200 $5 Footlongs! Additionally, Subway will be making some changes to its policies. For example, every one of its franchises will have to use a “measurement tool” on each sandwich to make sure that they’re living up to size guidelines. The corporate offices will also be making sure that they amend training materials, as well as clear up policies that “allowed for a small tolerance in the size of a Footlong sandwich.” If the franchise owners don’t live up to those policies, they may lose their licenses to operate a Subway branch.

While the settlement isn’t fully set in stone–there’s going to be a final hearing in January–it’s pretty much certain that we’re all now guaranteed appropriately-sized sandwiches at Subways across the nation.

I’m proud to be an American–a nation where we can sue a major corporation over the fact that our fast food is a fraction smaller than we expect it to be. That’s true freedom.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Size Does Matter: Subway is Settling Small Sandwich Suit appeared first on Law Street.

It’s the weekend, so time to check out Law Street’s weird arrests of the week. Give a look at the slideshow below:

Don’t Drink and Fly

Image courtesy of Bernal Saborio via Flickr

Jeff Rubin, 27, from Oregon, was arrested after he urinated on other passengers during a flight. He was, unsurprisingly, intoxicated and arrested upon arrival.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

I say at least once a week that I want something on a t-shirt. Some quote or another that just rolls out of my mouth, out of a friend’s mouth, or out of the mouth of a Shonda Rhimes character. Some are life philosophies and would actually fit on a t-shirt (Shut Up. Dance It Out.) and some are way too long to put on a t-shirt unless it’s quite creatively done (“They share food, and they say things, and they move, and they breathe. Ugh. They’re like, happy.” “Kick them out.”).

I always want to emblazon these little puppies a tee or tank to (a) make myself squee and (b) irritate and confuse the cishets when I cruise down the street. I want an entire line of these snarky wonders for the gym: sample, “Lesbians love to eat their own.”

"Lesbians Love to eat their own." -Alice #TheLWordQuotes

— L Word Quotes (@TheLWordQuotes) May 27, 2011

I never actually make any of these t-shirts or tank tops.

But this week, Autostraddle did.

From crop tops to crew shirts, the online lesbian media hub has created a line of “Gal Pal” wear, just in time for summer’s last hoorah. And the cishets won’t know it–y’all might think, “oh, isn’t that cute, girls make such great friends to each other, adorable”–we actually mean it to spite you.

Because Autostraddle released–during their Gal Pal Week–a celebratory list of women characters having genuine friendships with other women characters in the media. And the kicker–a lot of these women are queer.

And this is important, because “gal pals” is typically a phrase used by mainstream or cishet (which, in case you don’t know, equals cisgender + heterosexual) media to erase queer women’s identities, desires, and relationships. Our romantic relationships on television are so often dismissed, denied, and washed away (is straightwashing a word?). When two women characters have phenomenal sexual and personal chemistry, they are so often dismissed as “gal pals,” not people who could be/are lovers (or would for sure be lovers if one were written as a man).

As is often necessary, I go to tumblr to provide further explanation:

So when Autostraddle wants to sell me a “gal pals” shirt, I want to buy it. Because yes, we do have gal pals (Meredith and Cristina, anyone?), and we should celebrate each other.

But we also have lovers and desires and chemistries that are erased by mainstream media under the label of “gal pals.”

So when the cishets might think my shirt (which, if my track record proves anything, I won’t actually buy) is cute, I’ll be snickering in my mind (like the wonderful tumblr user above)–“hehe, gal pals. It’s cute how you think you know what you’re talking about.”

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lesbian Humor is Amazing appeared first on Law Street.

Lawyers. You can’t count on them for anything. It is why I decided to go into legal editing out of law school instead of actually doing a despicable thing like practicing. I mean, lawyers have to have good malpractice insurance because at some point, they are going to be sued for something stupid or dishonest that they did–not because the client is an idiot. No. It will definitely be the attorney’s fault.

Courtesy of Giphy.

What type of dumb or shady thing would a lawyer do anyway? I am sure we can all come up with some lackluster examples, but I have one that beats all of yours. What if a woman were to go to the office of a divorce lawyer and ask for help with her divorce? And what if, on hearing this request, that lawyer went ahead and helped her without giving her the proper disclosure that getting a divorce could lead to being divorced? Clearly that attorney would just be trying to get that paycheck without any regard for the client, right?

I am sure you–if you are a lawyer or are preparing to be one–would never make this mistake. I mean, you probably have warning signs in your office to alert incoming clients to this little-known side effect of divorce. I am sure you are all good guys looking to help your clients, not trick them; however, at least one lawyer has done this hateful crime. And it all happened in the UK.

Jane Mulcahy is a good Catholic who would never do something horrible like get a divorce. So when she entered the office of what would soon be her archenemies and asked for help with her divorce, she did not, and could not, know that soon the worst thing imaginable would happen: she would be divorced.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Now, as Ms. Mulcahy was not herself familiar with the field of law, it could not be expected that she came into the law firm with the knowledge that we, members of the legal world, have on this subject. I still remember, after all, the week in law school that we spent talking about the meaning of divorce and how, at the end of the proceedings, it would somehow end up with the termination of a marriage. It was a shocking revelation, indeed, and one that not a lot of outsiders were privy. So, of course, with this being such a legal secret, it is very plausible that this poor, abused woman had no idea what a divorce was when she asked for one.

Because of the murky definition of divorce, and knowledge of Mulcahy’s strong religious beliefs, it was the duty of her solicitors to inform her that if she were to get a divorce, her marriage would, in fact, be terminated. Also, they should have advised her instead to get a judicial separation–which is basically just all the benefits of a divorce without the sin of a failed marriage. In other words, it was perfect for Mulcahy, and yet her lawyers did not let her know about it. (It is my humble opinion that divorces probably make the lawyers more money, and so they deceitfully hid the meaning of divorce from their client to make a few more bucks from themselves. They should be ashamed.)

Courtesy of Giphy.

When Mulcahy learned of the trickery that had been done to her, she did not take it lying down. Instead, she sued. See, dirty lawyers? This is what happens when you play fast and loose with the lives of your clients: you get sued and lose lots of money … wait. What? A judge dismissed the claim? Man. Clearly, we are dealing with a crooked judicial team as well. Will justice ever be served to the poor, downtrodden Mulcahys of the world? Probably not. They all have pretty bad karma from committing the sin of divorce. Payback is a bitch, after all.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Woman Sues Because Her Divorce Ended in Divorce appeared first on Law Street.

Law school can seem scary. And boring. And hard. And when you realize you not only willingly entered this scary, boring, hard institution, but you forked over a whole lot of money to do so, you might begin to ask yourself, “What in the world is the matter with me?” So, for all you 1Ls who have just started or who are about to start, I just want to let you know that mixed in with the all the serious, dry information you are going to read, which may or may not be useful in your future careers, there are some weird, ridiculous cases you will study that are going to offer you some much needed comic relief.

To prove my point, I am going to tell you about some of the more fun cases that stood out so much that I still remember them this long after I graduated. Not only that, but I managed to wade through my murky memory to come up with a case from five of the basic 1L courses…yes, even contracts. I’ll give you plots, but I’m not giving away endings here. There are no spoiler alerts — I don’t want any angry professors coming after me because students weren’t coming to class since I already taught them everything they needed to know.

The Haunted Property

In Stambovsky v. Ackley, 169 A.D.,2d 254, we learn that, yes, ghosts are real…or, well, at least, that a house can be legally haunted. This all began when Jeffrey Stambovsky tried to buy a house from Helen Ackley. Well, I guess it really started before he tried to buy a house from Helen Ackley. Like, say, when she started advertising the house as haunted. And I’m not talking about that one time she told a friend over coffee, I’m talking about real press advertising. That’s right, she put her ghost story in print — in both the local paper and in Reader’s Digest. She did not, however, tell the ghost story in the description of the house, or in the contract, or in any verbal communications that she or her realtor had with Mr. Stanbovsky.  And let me tell you, when Stanbovsky found out he had just purchased a bunch of poltergeists, he was less than pleased. In fact, he was so mad he wanted to get out of the contract (so see, really you’re getting two entertaining contract stories here).

Courtesy of tumblr.

Of course, Ms. Ackley tried say the ghosts had moved out — or didn’t exist — or were just a figment of her imagination. In other words, she was all like, “Are you crazy? Of course this house isn’t haunted! Where ever did you come up with such an idea?” (not a direct quote). But the court disagreed. They basically told her, “You can’t go around telling the press you’ve got a ghost, and then all of a sudden claim you don’t just to make a sale. You’ve got a haunted house, so don’t try to deny it.” (Again, not a direct quote.) But here is a direct quote for you: “…as a matter of law, the house is haunted.” Weird, right? But, does the fact that the house is haunted mean that Ackley was required to disclose this?

Moral Contracts

There is nothing worse than having a family member promise you something only to have him later say, “Haha, sucker, April Fool’s.” In the pivotal case of Hamer v. Sidway, 124 N.Y. 538, William E. Story II found this out the hard way. William E. Story the original, and also the uncle of II, told his nephew that all he had to do to get $5,000 (which is basically a whole lot of money seeing as how this case is really old) was to keep away from tobacco, alcohol, swearing, and playing billiards and cards for money — so basically don’t have fun — until he turned 21.

II really wanted that money, so he accepted and completed the challenge. When he turned 21, he asked for his money and was told the uncle wanted to hold onto it until the nephew was a little older, but he would get it with interest. So the uncle held onto it and held onto it until eventually he died still holding onto it. II transferred his interest to his wife who transferred her interest to someone else who said to the estate something like, “Hey, where’s my money?” They answered by basically saying, “What? You thought that was a real contract? Hahahahahaha…” with the laughter continuing for a while. This, of course, led to the interest holder going to court. But of course I’m not telling you the result of the court case here.

It’s Raining Cows and Torts

Whenever I am having a bad day, I just say “Well, at least a cow hasn’t fallen on my head today.” Because, let’s be honest, nothing that happened to me is as bad as that. On April 15, 1954 Fannie Guthrie could legitimately claim that she had a bad day because she couldn’t say that a cow hadn’t fallen on her head. In Guthrie v. Powell, 178 Kan. 589, Torts students learn about a fun little legal term: res ipsa loquitur. I’m not going to go into the legalese of that, but what I will tell you is this: if someone is on the first floor of a building where a public sale is taking place, has permission to be there, and is just generally minding her own business when unexpectedly (because there is no way to expect this) a six-hundred pound steer located on the second floor falls through the ceiling and lands on said someone, that person likely will sue using the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.

I told my sister about this case, and she asked me a very logical question, one that most people would ask when hearing about a steer landing on a lady: “Oh no! Was the steer hurt?”

Courtesy of gifsoup.

Is Sexual Healing a Criminal (Law) Offense?

Since you all are going to law school, and not medical school, you may not yet know the following wisdom I am about to impart on you: if a “doctor” calls you out of the blue and tells you that you have a fatal disease that can only be cured by an expensive, painful surgery or by having sex with a donor inoculated with the vaccine, do not go have sex with that donor. There is actually no disease for which this is a recognized cure, I’m sorry to tell you. Unfortunately for Ms. R, she did not have me to guide her, and so she, not being a doctor and not being insured, felt she had no choice but to pay this donor to inject her. Turns out, this was all a fraud, so she called rape. But did the judge rule in her favor? Find out in Boro v. Superior Court, 163 Cal. App. 3d 1224.

Satan, Standing, and Civil Procedures

Satan and his staff are all pretty evil. So, it should be a safe bet to say that if you sue the devil, you are going to win (in court — I’m not speculating on what will happen to you when he gets you out from underneath the long arm of the law). However, in order to sue him, you have to be able to find him, because how else are you going to serve him his papers? Short of sending a poor clerk to the pits of hell, what should be done to make Satan pay for his crimes? Well, you can find out how to sue Satan in United States ex rel. Gerald Mayo v. Satan and His Staff, 54 F.R.D. 282, where Mayo claimed that the devil had, among other things, deprived him of some constitutional rights. (Or you can find out that you can’t sue Satan because of the very fact that they couldn’t serve process on Satan, but since I promised no spoilers, I won’t tell you which happened here.)

Courtesy of GIPHY.

So see? Law school isn’t always daunting and scary. Unless, of course, you’re scared of Satan, ghosts, and flying cows.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird, True, and Freaky: Law School Edition appeared first on Law Street.

All anyone seems to talk about recently is the Hobby Lobby case and women’s reproductive rights. I think this is grossly unfair. Yes, I agree that women’s health is important; but in all the hustle and bustle, we have forgotten about the other half of the population and their delicate reproductive systems. So, I’m going to bring those deprived, long-ignored men’s issues to the spotlight and finally give them the attention they deserve.

First, some background information that you just might not know:

• A man’s reproductive health is apparently directly linked to his fragile self-esteem. Take, for example, the policeman who sued rapper Meek Mill. Mill allegedly made derogatory comments in the press about the officer, which the cop claimed resulted in his boys in blue losing the heat they were formally packing. This just goes to show that men need a lot of (ego) stroking to remain functional.
• Long ago in France, women could sue for divorce if their husbands had ED. How, you ask, would they be able to prove this? Well, it turns out women didn’t have to prove anything. In a reversal on the old ‘innocent until proven guilty’ credo, it was the man’s job to prove he didn’t have a problem. In the infamous impotence trials, men might request a Trial by Congress allowing them to prove they could perform in the bedroom by, well, performing in the bedroom…in front of the court.
• In India, impotence was legally classified as mental cruelty. I think we can all agree with that. The frustration and shame that this causes is torturous (I assume), and I can understand why a court would say Mother Nature is a cruel mistress for causing it. Oh, wait…it’s mental cruelty caused by the man to his wife? Well, those poor men – it’s just never about them.

Now that you see that men all around the world and throughout time have been mistreated and hurt by their lack of reproductive support, I’m sure you will agree that women have been given way too much attention in the healthcare arena as of late.

Courtesy of Tumblr.

To help change that, I am going to tell you about a couple of lawsuits that resulted when the healthcare industry failed men and their genital health.

The Short Story

The first suit takes place across the border in Canada where a man was rushed to a Montreal hospital with a “fractured appendage.” Details of how the fracture occurred were not given, but what is known is that the injury happened while the man was performing his husbandly duties.

He went to the hospital with great faith that the experienced doctors would be able to help him. The doctors decided that surgery was needed and promptly acted to bring this man out of his misery.

Sadly for him, the procedure had some unintended effects: it left an ugly scar, it stopped him from having intimate relations with his wife, and, maybe worse than anything else, the doctors, like all my hairstylists, trimmed off more than was requested. He allegedly ended up an inch shorter, and unlike my hair, he can’t just wait two weeks for it to grow back. After all this, his unsatisfied wife left, presumably to find a man more able to meet her sizable needs.

The man is now suing the hospital for its alleged negligence and his “indescribable anguish.” The question now becomes, just how is he going to prove his claims? I hope for his sake he has before and after shots.

The Never-Ending Story

This next suit took place in Delaware where a truck driver needed some help getting his motor started: to get back to business, he jump-started his equipment with penile implant surgery.

After the surgery, the man’s ED was gone so you might think to yourself, “Success! Good for that lucky devil!” Unfortunately, the surgery left him with a new concern: he could shift into high gear but couldn’t get back to neutral.

If you have ever seen a Viagra commercial then you know that if your erection lasts more than four hours, you should probably contact a doctor. This trucker must not be a late-night television watcher, though, because he didn’t contact the hospital until a firm eight months had passed.

That’s right: he had an eight-month erection. That’s real stamina.

The doctors claimed they weren’t entirely at fault because the man should have come to them sooner, like maybe when, after the surgery, his “scrotum swelled to volleyball size.” Anyway, another surgery fixed the current problem and a third surgery fixed the initial problem, but it still left the man with bad memories and a lot of medical bills.

The angry driver did what any man who suffered from eight months of hardship would do: he began a medical malpractice suit alleging negligence on the part of the doctors.

I’m sad to say that once again our legal system failed to protect the sexual health and well-being of our male population: it took less than two hours for a jury of his peers to decide that there was no negligence.

I’m all for civil justice, but I think we cannot reach equality until we consider all people. Stand up for men’s rights today!

Courtesy of Tumblr.

—

Ashley Shaw (@Smoldering_Ashs) is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time.

Featured image courtesy of [Hammerin Man via Flickr]

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Penile Code: The Unappreciated Plight of Men’s Reproductive Health appeared first on Law Street.

What do Illinois nuns and a New Jersey doctor have in common? Obviously the answer must be strip clubs. Strip clubs: some nuns can’t live with them, one doctor can’t live without them…mainly because when he tries to leave, they just lure him back in.

Exotic dancers are the stars of this post because they live wild lives resulting in legal hijinks that will amuse even the most button up among us. (Hopefully this short strip tease has been enough to get you to keep reading.)

Nuns, Noise, Neon Lights

If you’ve ever been to a club (I’m just talking about a regular club right now, we’ll get to the strip part in just a bit), then you know that electro-pop, techno-y dance music is loud. Like, get in your head, you can’t think of anything else and you certainly can’t hold a conversation with someone loud.

Now, close your eyes and picture yourself out on the dance floor, or even right outside the club, pulsating music pounding through your veins. No matter how much you might want to, don’t start to dance. Instead, sit down and say your nightly prayer. Can you do it?

Well, the Missionary Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo Scalabrinians say they have been trying this exercise for quite some time now, and the answer is no, they cannot pray in this environment. Bordering strip joint, Club Allure, was open less than a year before the nuns decided to bring suit alleging that the club broke a state law requiring an adult-entertainment facility to be at least 1,000 feet from a place of worship. And just in case nobody wants to enforce that pesky law, the nuns are also saying this place is just a good old-fashioned public nuisance.

Club Allure claims that there are no police records supporting the sisters’ nuisance claim and that they have done nothing wrong. It is their intent to fight the nuns — I feel wrong even just typing that. So, the debate will move to the courts: are the neon lights, used condoms, and overall debauchery that plague the sisters on the regular – according to their claim – enough to shut down this scintillating business? Or will the sisters have to find a way to love their permanent neighbors?

Love and Loss

Don’t you hate it when strippers drug you and run up charges on your corporate card? Don’t you also hate it when you say you weren’t at the strip club on the nights charges were racked up, and are then told there is video surveillance of you actually being there?

If you hate those things, then you and Dr. Zyad K. Younan have a lot in common. Younan allegedly visited an elite gentleman’s club, Scores, four times in a 10-day period, racking up around $135,000 in food, drink, and…how best to put this…. ‘other’ charges. Only, instead of paying the tab or, if he couldn’t afford to pay, washing dishes in the back room like the rest of us poor slobs who can’t afford our bills, Younan decided to try contesting the charges with an impossibly absurd story. He claimed he didn’t owe the money because he wasn’t there and even if he was, he only spent money after being drugged out of his mind by the women. If this seems to be an elaborate “nana-nana-boo-boo, Scores, I’m not paying, and you can’t make me {sticks out tongue},” then keep reading for the secret, crazy plot twist.

If strip clubs didn’t need to constantly worry about lawsuits from nuns, then maybe Scores would have just let this drop. It turns out, however, that nuns are litigious and apparently so are strip joints. Scores sued Younan for the balance.

Addressing their upcoming suit and Younan’s claims of innocence, club spokesman Stephan Hyman addressed Younan’s drug complaint by asking the very question I wondered myself: If Younan was drugged that first night, then “why did he come back three more times? If he didn’t have a good time the first time, he should have stayed home the next three times.”

It turns out there is a legitimate possible answer: maybe Dr. Younan WAS ACTUALLY TELLING THE TRUTH!

A couple of months after this story placed Younan in an uncomfortable tabloid spotlight, the DEA and the New York police uncovered a ring of stripper-crooks who went to upscale bars and lured unsuspecting men back to strip clubs, Scores being one, spiked their drinks with drugs such as Molly, and then got them to sign off on huge bills in their druggy haze. And guess who their biggest alleged victim was: one Dr. Zyad K. Younan.

While the strippers have all been arraigned, there are no pending charges against the clubs themselves. And, as of a few weeks ago, Scores has not dropped the lawsuit. Will the strippers be convicted? Will Scores be paid? Will the doctor be vindicated? Only time will tell who has the best case: the strippers or the surgeon.

What I know is that, between the fun nun lawsuit and the stripper-con trials, I need someone to tell me why people always want to get out of jury duty. It seems like court would be a fun place to spend the day – as long as you bring a stack of ones.

Courtesy of Giphy

—

Ashley Shaw (@Smoldering_Ashs) is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time.

Featured image courtesy of [Geralt via Pixabay]

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Strip Suits: Exotic Dancers in Court appeared first on Law Street.

Journalist Mignon McLaughlin once said that “a sense of humor is a major defense against minor troubles.” However, in the legal world, the inverse is often shown to be true: a sense of humor is only a minor defense against major troubles.

When pleading insanity just seems too mundane, creative criminal defendants come up with some unusual defenses to prove their innocence; but, funny as these may be, do they actually work? Maybe sometimes, but let’s look at two such defenses that most likely will never lead to an innocent verdict.

Fat Men Can’t Murder

In 2006, the ironically named Edward Ates was accused of driving from Florida to New Jersey to kill his son-in-law. Even though the prosecution painted Ates as a competent marksman with some military experience, said he had been doing online research on how to kill, submitted a conversation he had with his sister in which they went over the timeline of events, and had his own sister testify that her brother had her lie to the police about where he was at the time of the murder, his attorney said Ates could not possibly be the killer.

But why?

Well, for one, the damning military experience turned out to be a desk job. Also, apparently people with too much time on their hands often pick up hobbies — up to and including researching methods to commit murder. Oh yeah, and did I mention he was really, really fat? Because that’s important.

You, like the defense, might be asking yourself how a man who weighed 300 pounds at only 5’8” could possibly drive for 21 hours straight, walk up four steps, and still manage to hold a gun straight. My guess is that it was just the adrenaline rush you get in exciting situations; instead of suddenly being able to lift a car off a child, perhaps this guy was able to make a short climb in order to get rid of someone who must have been — assuming guilt here — a real nuisance in his life. The defense, on the other hand, apparently wouldn’t have bought my potential solution. According to them, there was no way this man could have successfully completed such a physically taxing feat, and thus he must be innocent.

As it turns out, the jury at this trial didn’t buy the obesity defense and the fat man was convicted of first degree murder.

(This case actually made it on appeal to New Jersey’s highest court in States vs. Ates, 217 N.J. 253 (2014), but it got there on the merits of whether the admitted evidence of the wiretapped call between Ates and his sister was legal in the state of New Jersey — not on whether obesity is a legitimate legal defense. The high court concluded that the evidence was admissible, and the verdict stands.)

Good Jokes Aren’t Illegal

Did you hear the one about the man who “accidentally” poured gasoline on his nag of a wife and then pulled out a lighter and tried to light it — all while winking at his young son? Do you get the punch line? I don’t, but there must be one somewhere in there or otherwise the defense that this all happened “as a joke” just wouldn’t make sense.

I am the type of person who likes to find humor in life. I am always up for a good joke, whether knock-knock or practical. However, Khemraj Samlall’s recent “prank” just seems to have fallen flat.

This all started when Samlall got home really late, or rather really early, one morning and, as is not surprising, when he arrived, he was a little drunk. His wife was not thrilled. She berated him for his actions; he threatened her with a knife in front of her child, went and got a gas can, doused her in gas (not on purpose according to him), and then pulled out a lighter. Basically, tit for tat.

According to him, this was all done as a joke. Are you laughing as hard as he apparently was? As the events mentioned above only happened recently, there has yet to be a trial, though Samlall has been accused of “aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without the intent to kill.” And while I normally try to keep my legal opinions to myself, I feel pretty confident that I know how this defense will work out for Samlall if he can find an attorney willing to try it: if nobody laughs at your joke, it probably isn’t funny.

Justice Scalia once said, “I don’t want a competent lawyer. I want a lawyer who’s going to get me off.” United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (2006). However, if your counsel — or intended defense — is neither competent nor likely to work, maybe you should move on to plan B.

—

Ashley Shaw (@Smoldering_Ashs) is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time.

Featured image courtesy of [Divine Harvester via Flickr]

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dubious Defenses: When Humor and the Court Just Don’t Mix appeared first on Law Street.